There is just too much crazy going around lately. Seriously. Too. Much.

[I’m lookin’ at you Tom Delay, Jerry Boykin & Crazy Conservative Truck Couple]

Seriously, y’all just gotta cut it out.

This morning I woke up to the news that a former Senator’s assertion that God wrote the Constitution of the United States AND that a Former U.S. General said that Jesus is going to come back as Rambo in a robe, covered in the blood of his enemies and carrying an AR-15. Not only that, but he asserted that the second amendment came from Jesus, “Now I want you to think about this: where did the Second Amendment come from? … From the Founding Fathers, it’s in the Constitution. Well, yeah, I know that. But where did the whole concept come from? It came from Jesus…the sword today is an AR-15, so if you don’t have one, go get one. You’re supposed to have one. It’s biblical.”

First, let’s address the fact that God did not write the Constitution or any other part of the law of the United States. (If you missed what Tom Delay said you can listen to it here). It is hard for me to believe that is something that actually needs to be said but apparently it does. Is there Judeo-Christian influence present in our laws? Of course. Were any of our laws or our Constitution authored by God directly or indirectly? Hell, no. As Benjamin Corey said on his blog today,

What’s scary about this [Delay’s statement], is that people functionally believe it. Perhaps not many are dumb enough to actually believe that it’s true, but after having it drilled into their heads repeatedly that God is somehow connected with the constitution, people functionally operate as if this document came from God and cannot be questioned. Obviously it’s not– my children are not less of a person because of the color of their skin, God isn’t the one who killed Native Americans in order to set up shop here, God isn’t the one who built our wealth on the backs of slaves… the US constitution did NOT come from God.

Mr. Delay’s statements bring up all sorts of questions, such as, “If God wrote the Constitution did he also write the Second Amendment to the Constitution? Retired General Jerry Boykin, who is now working for the Family Research Council, says yes. In a seemingly unrelated and yet shockingly parallel universe, a recording came to light yesterday of General Boykin discussing what Jesus will be like when he returns. You can listen to it here:

Yes folks you heard that right, but if you’d like to read it again, here you go…

“The Lord is a warrior and in Revelation 19 it says when he comes back, he’s coming back as what? A warrior. A mighty warrior leading a mighty army, riding a white horse with a blood-stained white robe … I believe that blood on that robe is the blood of his enemies ’cause he’s coming back as a warrior carrying a sword.

And I believe now – I’ve checked this out – I believe that sword he’ll be carrying when he comes back is an AR-15.

Now I want you to think about this: where did the Second Amendment come from? … From the Founding Fathers, it’s in the Constitution. Well, yeah, I know that. But where did the whole concept come from? It came from Jesus when he said to his disciples ‘now, if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.’

I know, everybody says that was a metaphor. IT WAS NOT A METAPHOR! He was saying in building my kingdom, you’re going to have to fight at times. You won’t build my kingdom with a sword, but you’re going to have to defend yourself. And that was the beginning of the Second Amendment, that’s where the whole thing came from. I can’t prove that historically and David [Barton] will counsel me when this is over, but I know that’s where it came from. And the sword today is an AR-15, so if you don’t have one, go get one. You’re supposed to have one. It’s biblical.”

Okay, first off, “that blood on that robe is the blood of his enemies”? Oh is it now? So much for all that love your enemies stuff that Jesus said. I don’t know about you but I believe that the blood on his robe is his own blood. I also believe that blood is symbolic. I believe it is symbolic of our sins being forgiven and “not just our sins, but the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2). But sadly for Gen. Boykin his image is of Jesus in a robe stained by the blood of his own enemies because he just mowed them down with an AR-15. I guess the folks in the truck I saw this morning agree that this is what loving ones enemies looks like. For the life of me I don’t know how these folks get from Jesus laying down his life for others because of his great love to this Jesus. Oh wouldn’t the world be a better place if we could just kill all the people we disagree with. Holy Hannah! What kind of love is that?

Next, we have Jesus coming up with the second amendment when he tells the guys to sell their cloaks and buy a couple swords (or AR-15s, you say potato…). To quote Benjamin Corey from Formerly Fundie again,

That passage is found in Luke 22, and is just before Jesus is arrested:

“He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment. The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.” “That’s enough!” he replied.”

Those who quote this verse to support the idea that Jesus endorses violence have to quote just the first part without the whole context. What’s neat about this passage is that it doesn’t leave you wondering what it’s about– Jesus clearly tells us. By citing an OT prophesy of being “numbered with transgressors” Jesus tells them to bring two swords to the garden. The reason, Jesus tells us, is that so he could be counted and arrested as an armed criminal. We know that Jesus didn’t intend the swords for violent reasons because (a) He tells them that 2 were plenty, which they weren’t if it were for self defense (b) when the disciples actually use them for self-defense in the garden (Peter) he rebukes him with another command for nonviolence: “No more of this! He who lives by the sword will die by the sword.”

There is nothing in this passage that indicates Jesus approved of violence, only the contrary.

All this Jesus as Rambo stuff caused my friend Josh to opine on a Facebook discussion today, “Isn’t that what they thought he would be like the first time?” You would think we would learn.

Sadly men like Delay and Boykin have so blurred the lines between their religion and their patriotism that they have begun to think of our founding documents as scripture and to believe that scripture (specifically their interpretation of it) should be the law of our land. *shudder* God help us all. I wrote a blog post about that very concept last year when I heard a guy on the radio say that the Bible trumps the law of the United States. Oh really now? I need only ask one question to illustrate why this is such a bad idea: Whose version of the Bible? Whose interpretation of it? Theirs? or (heaven help them), mine? Maybe the Pope’s or Rob Bell’s? Doesn’t this eventually lead to a Supreme Court of sorts to determine what is Biblical and what isn’t? Isn’t that just a Christian version of Sharia law? And how about this? If you believe the Constitution is God breathed why did it need so many amendments? And if it was these guy’s God who wrote it, why didn’t it already have a clause in there about marriage being between one man and one woman? Why didn’t it ban homosexuality? Things that make you say hmmm.